At present, network management mainly employs a hierarchical management mode. FIG. 1 is an architecture schematic diagram of a network management system in the related art. As shown in FIG. 1, each of the Element Management Systems (EMS) manages Net Elements (NE) in the sub-networks, and the Network Management System (NMS) manages NEs in the whole network via EMSs. The unitizational relationship and permission among EMSs have relatively high independence, and each NE can be managed by only one EMS. As shown in FIG. 1, EMS1 to EMS4 independently undertake management of NEs governed by them.
Although the network management system is not the core of business, it also has requirements on high performance and high stability. When the managed network is huge and there are many managed NEs, if the above hierarchical network management mode is employed, the system needs to be established by high-performance hardware equipment. Furthermore, as each EMS is independent, each EMS needs at least an expensive equipment with high performance in the network management architecture shown in FIG. 1. So, the cost of network management with the network architecture shown in FIG. 1 is relatively high.
In addition, as the unitizational relationship and permission among EMSs have relatively high independence and each NE can be managed by only one EMS, when one of the EMSs breaks down, other EMSs are unable to take over the operation of the EMS automatically, as a result, tasks charged by the EMS cannot be executed normally (for example, relevant management data cannot be collected). In order to avoid this problem, it is necessary to equipment a spare EMS for each EMS, the cost of network management system is further increased. Furthermore, as spare EMSs are idle for the most of time, the utilization of equipment is also lowered.